QUOTE: rsheehy @ Dec 30 2005, 09:54 PM
My point was that many people are blind to RMW's flaws...
I'm interested in people's opinions, but I'm not
interested in ritualistic, unthinking "RM is the best by a
Here's the bones of my reason for reply (no, I didn't
criticise the direction of the KH long holes, I used it as an
example of where a short sighted person might throw up
You will see in my post that I clearly stated what you have done
above that I've partially pasted here. That a KH fan has to
put up with exactly what you have indicated above. A ferver for
RMW that is often gained blindly and by convention rather than
dissection. No qualms there.
But you stated the following in your first post:
"No true 3 shot holes.
As I've said before I just don't get RMW #5.
A mid length par 3 with a narrow slopey green. Big deal.
#6 has that silly slopey green
#8 & #9 are dull--no surprise they don't make the compo
#10 is just a hole
#12 What is it trying to be?
#18 is one of the poorest driving holes on the sandbelt."
I personally believe that this damning of the par 5s, #5, #6,
#10, #12 with such faint praise is derogatory in itself. Yes, I
do feel that the collective comments on the par 5s would appear
to the first time reader that they may collectively be lacking if
one played the course. So without belying the quality of a single
hole, they've been swept aside by a comment possibly as
shortsighted as a dismissal of KH's long holes on the basis
of routing, again a train of thought that ignores them
individually. And the comments on the other holes made me fall
off my chair. I'm sure if I played all the world's great
holes, there'd be some I don't get too. But if it is me
versus most of planet earth, then perhaps I'll defer and find
other areas to promote my cause. Nothing unreasonable in your
overall views if you think that way, but I'll repeat
something from my previous post which I believe to be the most
crucial point of either yours or St Andrews' initial posts:
That the blind RMW supporter who can't back up their
view will have to in the process, deny KH of its quality with a
similar lack of enthusiasm for part of KH's brilliance. I
feel you and St Andrews have done exactly that of RMW in your
promotion of KH, thereby falling into the same trap.
Don't forget, some of the accepted iconic status of RMW is
not just blindly held, but in many cases, believed by those with
a lot more wisdom than I in architecture and backed up every time
those people play it again.
You want considered justification, I'll give you this on #6.
The green is a masterpiece. I have seen it competently pinned all
over the place. Only deliberate attempts to push the envelope in
dry conditions renders fair portions of the green too hot to pin.
Don't use modern low cut and high speed practices (which
aren't in place much of the year and I've rarely ever
seen them here outside of the times I carried a bag and had a
dude's name on my back) to dismiss a green as
"slopey." With the right speeds, slopey is great golf.
It has more square feet of pinnable space than a vast number of
fine holes of similar length or what have you most of the year
round. It has the entire right half of the green virtually, with
superb demanding but perfectly fair points front left and back
left. These spots are even used quite fairly during pro
tournaments in the dried heat of February.
The tee shot has held its quality despite evolving against its
will over time. It was once a tough carry, which has now become a
very thoughtful line of play decision. There's fat to the
left where the might of space results in an awkward lie to play
in to the green. And there's more advantageous room to the
right which is much tighter and any veering from the intended
line brings all manner of trouble into play. It has room around
the green for the member requiring a 5, with both the space to
the right and the right bunker not overtly threatening, and yet
consigning the average player to a near certain 3 more shots
unless they play a very fine shot from there. For the good
player, the second shot has a myriad of options and both
opportunities and threats galore. The shot looks more daunting
than it is (especially for a right side hole location) but still
plays tough if the player doesn't get it right. The knowledge
of the trouble that can be incurred for a miss is penal enough.
Frankly, this green after an uphill shot is a gem. It threatens
and penalises, but is quite benign if played calmly and with
reassurance unless the hole is cut far left. For the player
playing the hole well, the result is never in the bag. For the
average player chopping it, a conservative route means they are
never diabolically in the poop. This is justifiably one of the
nations' greatest par 4s.
When you say that #5 is a "mid length par 3 with a narrow
slopey green. Big deal." And that #6 "has that silly
slopey green" and that "#10 is just a hole", you
floor me, in addition to your post on #3-#6. It makes part of the
debate unfair, and I'll explain why. You've taken some
great holes, torn down their veneer, and then expect somebody to
rebuild their respect from scratch in order to provide acceptable
debate. Even without automatically revering RMW, there is a level
respect and quality in those holes, which sure, must be justified
by a debater, but it would be ridiculous to think they have to
have their credibility rebuilt from scratch in order to comprise
of acceptable debate. Again, the KH supporter takes apart part of
RMW's reputation in the workshop, and expects the RMW fan to
put it back together.
How about building KH's credentials to take your
stance, instead of taking apart some of RMW's? You see, it
aint ritualistic praise of RMW for me. I actually believe part of
what you say is possibly hype. It is up to you to convince me by
promoting KH, not saying things about RMW I personally don't
believe to be true.
Every approach made to me by a competitor to switch jobs seems
focused around why I shouldn't be where I am, and not enough
regarding why I should be where they want me to go. As soon as
they use parts of my existing position as an assumed weakness, or
say that things I like about my job I perhaps overrate,
they've lost me because they need to make their case
completely independently of the existence of my current position.
If they can't, why would I go for it if I am very satisfied
where I am?
You see, I believe RMW has done a lot to earn its frequent spot
in the world top 10, and it is hardly unjustified for a world top
10 course to give off some sort of holy glow. I personally think
it is revered because it should be, not just because Johnny
Punter grabs the popular ball and runs with it.